^ Von Neumann was smarter, but Einstein made a deeper contribution to human knowledge. Von Neumann's myriad of contributions are very impressive and make me look like a total dumbass, but Theory of Relativity was probably one of the most groundbreaking scientific achievements. Von Neumann = exceptionally gifted polymath, Einstein = a true iconoclast. The latter is more important.

^ Von Neumann was smarter, but Einstein made a deeper contribution to human knowledge. Von Neumann's myriad of contributions are very impressive and make me look like a total dumbass, but Theory of Relativity was probably one of the most groundbreaking scientific achievements. Von Neumann = exceptionally gifted polymath, Einstein = a true iconoclast. The latter is more important.

Yuck. Einstein's contributions are mostly mathturbation without any applications for the improvement of the human condition. And its not clear how much of the theory of relativity should be attributed to him and not other contemporaries like Lawrence. Thath's why his Nobel was granted for his contributions to the theory of light. Don't get me wrong he was much smarter and influential that I could ever hope to be. But I think that he is seriously overrated for being a pop icon.

Von Neumann's growth theory is just a bunch of input-output matrices crap based on the labor theory of value.

^ Von Neumann was smarter, but Einstein made a deeper contribution to human knowledge. Von Neumann's myriad of contributions are very impressive and make me look like a total dumbass, but Theory of Relativity was probably one of the most groundbreaking scientific achievements. Von Neumann = exceptionally gifted polymath, Einstein = a true iconoclast. The latter is more important.
Yuck. Einstein's contributions are mostly mathturbation without any applications for the improvement of the human condition. And its not clear how much of the theory of relativity should be attributed to him and not other contemporaries like Lawrence. Thath's why his Nobel was granted for his contributions to the theory of light. Don't get me wrong he was much smarter and influential that I could ever hope to be. But I think that he is seriously overrated for being a pop icon.
Von Neumann has my vote any day of the week.

Besides Von Neumann does not stand out for his contributions alone. He was one of the intellectual leaders at the RAND corporation during WWII and in the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton many years after. He is important not just for his own contributions but also because of all the people he influenced (much like Russell)

Most of the early work on Computer Science and numerical methods is related to him, as well as most of game theory, both cooperative and non-cooperative.

What exactly did he do to Nash? Did you take a Beautiful Mind a little too seriously? Nash equilibrium is nothing but Von Neumann's minimax equilibrium applied to non zero sum games, it should be called Von Neumann equilibrium.

I read the book, and I met with Nash a few times. Nash equilibrium is not the same as minimax. Its idea dates back to Cournot. Minimax is quite limited in scope as it only applies to zero sum games and doesn't take the equilibrium idea seriously. On top of that, the existence proof is the basis of the Arrow-Debreu-Mackensie proof which shaped 1950-1965 theory in economics.

What exactly did he do to Nash? Did you take a Beautiful Mind a little too seriously? Nash equilibrium is nothing but Von Neumann's minimax equilibrium applied to non zero sum games, it should be called Von Neumann equilibrium.

Definition is exactly the same. Its based on the notions of expected utility and mixed strategies from VNM's book. And the proof (just like the ADM proof) is a straightforward application of Kakutanis theorem.

But in any case, in which way was Nahs' contribution not influenced by Von Neumann?

I read the book, and I met with Nash a few times. Nash equilibrium is not the same as minimax. Its idea dates back to Cournot. Minimax is quite limited in scope as it only applies to zero sum games and doesn't take the equilibrium idea seriously. On top of that, the existence proof is the basis of the Arrow-Debreu-Mackensie proof which shaped 1950-1965 theory in economics.
What exactly did he do to Nash? Did you take a Beautiful Mind a little too seriously? Nash equilibrium is nothing but Von Neumann's minimax equilibrium applied to non zero sum games, it should be called Von Neumann equilibrium.

It was influenced, but instead of helping the young smart sick dude, he preferred to say that he didn't believe in the equilibrium story and instead said all the relevant stuff was already in the theory of games ...